Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Fandel v. Fandel, 2:15-CV-01430-JCM-PAL. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20150923c89 Visitors: 14
Filed: Sep. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2015
Summary: UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD; ORDER THEREON (Second Request) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . The United States of America, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order extending to October 8, 2015, the time in which it must respond to plaintiffs' verified first amended complaint. In support of its motion, the United States asserts as follows: 1. The United States Attorney for the District of Nevada was served with th
More

UNITED STATES' MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD; ORDER THEREON (Second Request)

The United States of America, through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an order extending to October 8, 2015, the time in which it must respond to plaintiffs' verified first amended complaint. In support of its motion, the United States asserts as follows:

1. The United States Attorney for the District of Nevada was served with the summons and complaint in intervention in this action on July 9, 2015.

2. On July 27, 2015, this case was timely removed from the District Court of Clark County to this Court.

3. On July 28, 2015, the United States filed its first motion for extension of time to answer or otherwise plead. This was to address the anomaly under the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure which provides the United States far less time to serve its answer or other responsive pleading in a removed action than it would receive if it were sued in Federal court in the first place. In this case, the government would have had only 25 days to respond under Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(2)(C), rather than the 60 days afforded it under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2).

4. On July 31, 2015, the Court granted the motion for extension of time. (Doc. 5).

5. The United States respectfully requests a second extension of time, as counsel for the United States has not yet received from the Internal Revenue Service the material necessary to respond to the complaint and defend its interests, as well as obtain the Service's views on the matter. This motion is not being made for delay, but to permit the United States to prepare a cogent and accurate response which would advance this litigation.

6. Both the Federal and local civil rules authorize this Court to grant, for good cause, an extension of time in which to answer or otherwise plead. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b); LR 6-1.

7. In moving for an extension of time, the United States does not waive any defenses listed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h).

For these reasons, the United States requests that its motion for an extension of time be granted, and that it be given until and including October 8, 2015, in which to serve its response to plaintiffs' complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer